Blog Archives
Is MeWe a Profiling/Psyops Project?
MeWe was supposed to put an end to social media dictators who punish free speech, presume to be sole judge of what is need of censorship, practice political mind control, and market your life for fun and profit. But is that what it is really about?
by H. Michael Sweeney proparanoid.wordpress.com Facebook proparanoid.net
Dateline, Oct 30, 2020, from an cluttered garage collapsing into a growing Marxist sink hole. copyright © 2020, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this notice and byline, are included. Quote freely, links requested. Please comment any such repost or quote link to original posting. Fair Use Law in play.
Whut?
Basic observations of MeWe for most users have been previously accepted as normal and ideal… but should be reviewed to provide context, and in fairness. At a point when other Social Media (SM) was shown at best to be a propaganda and censorship tool of the Far Left, and it became clear that millions of conservatives were looking for alternatives, MEWE came to the rescue with impeccable timing. Unlike any other SM, it features a direct MeWe management/operations dialog channel to users, a very responsive contact help feature where problems and questions can be addressed rather quickly. I have found this feature extremely valuable many times, with all due praise.
Of most importance, unlike prior SM, it did not censor, but provided user tools to limit unwanted content, putting you in control, instead of some ‘community standard from Hell’; it did not collect and market your preferences and interests to advertising sources; and it seemed devoid of automated bots and Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) trolls. Seemed. Yes, they did have ‘community standards,’ but YOU had to be the one to complain, instead of a staff of snoops reviewing A.I. sniffers for keywords, phrases, names, or verboten URL inclusions. FYI, Facebook deems my propranoid.net URL verboten, despite the fact that everything there is backed up with authoritative sources, or is stated as either a suspected/possible, a claim by someone else, or a personally believed but unproven matter as of yet.
It is important that the reader understand that I am a retired privacy/security consultant and author of 8 books on that and related topics, such as abuse of power and Political Control Technology (PCT). I have specialized in helping stalking victims, some 12,000 over several decades time. One common denominator of such victim experiences is cyber stalking by trolls and others in ways intended to make their life as difficult as possible, generally reducing them to a social, financial, and political zero. This would often include professional hacking and other forms of cyber warfare/invasions of online privacy, to include the use of automated SM bots and A.I. trolls. While I have credentials some might find useful in discussing Web security and technology matters, I do not claim to be that person, today, since retirement; the field advances quickly, leaving inactive professionals behind.
Therefore, for the purpose, I define a troll as a ‘user’ (often a pack of many fake user IDs operated by a single entity) who goes out of their way to be obnoxious, start arguments with inflammatory statements, becomes childishly emotional instead of engaging in reasoned dialog, resorts to name calling and a combination of other of the 25 Rules of Disinformation. I wrote those rules, and they have been used in various college courses on psychology, journalism, and political science. Yes, anyone can use one without evil in mind, but any calculated use the Rules repeatedly, is intending to obscure or confound truth. It is primarily used by to negate the person/group attempting to present a truth deemed unacceptable to a given agenda supported by the user of the rules.
When multiple rules are in play, from multiple SM user IDs, it almost always indicates a professional disinfo or ‘wag the dog’ artist at work, and can even mean a psyops effort is under way. That can also mean the use of a bot or A.I. In the broader view of todays Marxist MainStream Media (MSM), it works the same way with talking heads pushing false narratives… they become the trolls.
When psyops is additionally in play, as when someone is targeted by government for speaking an unwanted truth too loudly, it also usually means that surveillance and psychological profiles have been employed against the target. By such means, they know what will mentally manipulate them into a desired emotional knee-jerk response. Without knowing about these rules, a target will very likely so respond, and can then be ridiculed/shamed for it, resulting in retreat from the debate, and success for the disinfo effort. The most common online purpose of this level of disinfo, is in cover up operations, such as seen in the Flight 800 shoot-down coverup, where FBI, the DOD, FAA, and ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) all participated in a well organized disinfo effort against online truth seekers, to the point of sending FBI agents to intimidate us in person. Many didn’t cave, and we instead reached for a lawyer.
Those efforts included use of online Web bots as targeting tools, as well, which both helped to build the psychological profile, and to apply it effectively. Today, A.I. becomes the ultimate bot.
Bots of any sort, A.I., or no, must necessarily be active within the coded framework of the SM server’s software, if to be effective against multiple targets in near real-time usefulness. This is either by covert insertion (hacking methods or site security compromise), or by the intent of the SM provider, directly (as would likely be found true of Facebook, for instance, which has partnered with Agency (Central Intelligence Agency) in various ways.
The power of today’s A.I. is that it can truly seem to be a living person, instead of some computational algorithms in play. It can be set up to scan the entire SM user base to search all posts for select criteria which define targets in need of targeting, and then execute that function. An A.I. bot can simultaneously begin construction of an automated psychological profile for best effect, all without human interaction. Because it can report back to its owner, it might result in additional profiling steps in the real World, perhaps to include a full surveillance net 24/7. While likely true only for the most important of target truth-sayers, heaven help us all when they connect them to drones and other real-World systems, a’la Skynet: the purpose of the Internet of Things (5G) and Smartmeters from your power company.
If Agency psyops teams are sent, it will usually take up to six months to insure they have a very complete profile, down to sexual practices and preferences, financial standing, and all aspects of one’s personality and belief systems. To be sure, it isn’t so common a matter that the reader should start looking over their shoulder, because if can cost as much as $250K a month to undertake… but looking over your shoulder once in awhile, anyway, is always good advice. When used, it can mean intentional events being staged in the target’s life to observe their response, anything from something as simple as cutting you off on the highway and observing your driving skills, to something as complex as a traumatic event staged against a family member, such as a bullying event or assault. In recent times, the use of A.I. systems has likely reduced that ‘manual profile’ time frame significantly. When drones, et. al, are incorporated, the costs will be next to nothing, and no one will be safe from it.
Whut the Hell, MeWe?
Again, I say MeWe seemed free of such worries, in the beginning. Not my current finding.
First clue: A private MeWe Group I established for stalking victims was itself assaulted with sexual content from a non member. Stalking victims are generally of the same mindset, emotionally, as rape victims, if not actually a victim of rape by their stalker(s). I had to ask MeWe how a Group requiring a Membership acceptance process could be targeted by a non member through the Group Chat feature. Blocking the ‘user’ involved (a stranger unknown to me) did not work. This was the first time that MeWe absolutely refused to respond to a help/bug issue. Multiple inquiries went unanswered, and forced closure of the Group.
Second clue: like all social media which must remain accessible to the public at large, it was clear some liberals were among the general MeWe population, as it should be. I welcome them, if they are willing to engage in reasoned dialog and not behave like trolls and childish snowflakes. As long as MeWe isn’t ‘part of their argument,’ its all good. If they might not so behave, the Block tool affords an easy fix, making for an even playing field… because they could block me, too, if so moved. Then came something entirely different: a team of such trolls which could not be blocked. See them here in the image:
This was the second time a block failed, and it took place almost immediately upon the heels of the first. The ‘blocked’ user still showed in my contact list, and the unwanted Troll harassment continued. A repeat Block attempt did remove the user from my contact list, but did not end the assault (details next). Once more, multiple efforts at engaging MeWe went completely unanswered, beyond the autoresponder saying someone would contact me. Meanwhile, through this period, other help/complaint inquiries were answered quite normally and to satisfaction. It wasn’t due COVID manpower shortages, or any other excuse. Also true: other MeWe Members agreed with me that George and friends were trolls; it isn’t just my take.
Third clue: the nature of the continued harassment by ‘George and friends’ is perhaps the most important clue of an A.I. bot troll in play at MeWe. I log into MeWe perhaps 5-10 or more times a day. Despite being blocked, the post consistently appears with a new anti-Trump comment at the top of my notifications every time I do so, time stamped somewhere randomly between the most recent legitimate notification in the list, and the time of log-in. The only time it might not be at top is if I was too quick in checking for some reason, but it would be there the next time I checked.
This is a statistical impossibility for anything but a code embedded within MeWe’s system. Random samples shown in a partial screenshot from a folder full of examples:
Fourth clue: the notifications are for the same original MeWe post thread which resulted in the attempt to block ‘George’ in the first place, now approaching a year ago, in time. The notification is of new comments made to the original post. It is again highly improbable that ANYONE, much less 21 such anyones, would be electing to consistently, repeatedly through a day, every day, continue dialog on a post that old. While this would not be a trait of human trolls or of any other form of bot, it would be no problem for A.I.
Fifth clue: the only exception to an update so appearing, is if there have been so few posts since the prior log in, that the last update is still visible in the first few posts in the notification list. That is to say, it was already visible in the limited viewing area of the pull-down list. Again, that is something only an in-system Bot could determine.
Sixth clue: while in dialog with MeWe Help staff on an unrelated function glitch, and finding the staff helpful and concerned, I raised once more the ‘George’ issue. That ended all communications on both topics. And, that is when I decided to write this exposition… and to prepare to leave MeWe.
Seventh clue: somewhat synchronous with that cessation, a whole new batch of trolls suddenly appeared to comment on a variety of things I was commenting upon, even things apolitical (religious, news bits, you name it). I remind you of my definition of a Web troll, per the intro. They again came in packs or teams, and employed the exact same methods as did ‘George.’ I’m not putting up with it. I left Facebook because of it (and the other matters), and I will soon enough abandon MeWe, and suggest others might wish to evaluate their patronage, and certainly, to be alert and to evaluate any trolls they encounter against the above findings.
Because there is one more thing any MeWe user reading this should ask about it all…
Whut for would MeWe employ A.I. bots?
Call this a conspiracy theorist’s conjecture, if you wish. However, this theorist has been proven right again and again, and has put terrorists, bad Cops, criminals of all manner, and illegal CIA fronts out of action. My research has resulted in correctly forecasting (via what I call the Unified Conspiracy Theory) the downing of the WTC by false-flag terrorism and the resulting series of Middle East ‘oil wars,’ as well as a terror plot against Portland Oregon, which I thwarted (Gas Station Tasking). The WTC threats were warned of in an online posting I made in the fall of 1999, nearly two years ahead of the event, as detailed in several of my books. It also forecast with warning to Secret Service of an assassination attempt against a Presidential Candidate and his family, which took place a few weeks later and forced him (Ross Perot) out of the running the very night he won the votes to get on the ticket.
Given the mass exodus of conservatives to MeWe, and other alternatives as well, it would seem to be very useful to the Deep State to get all of us non liberals together into a fishbowl for psychological reviews. Once under water, it would help them identify ‘dangerous’ threats to leftist agenda and to target us for ‘destruction’ using the latest methods of psyops targeting. They would know who believes what, who agrees with who, and thereby, who might need special targeting consideration. At least some of those bubbles MeWe users see floating to the top of the MeWe tank disguised as fresh posts and comments, are likely signs they are now growing A.I. sponsored gills… which once dependent upon, could become an off switch.
Holding your breath hoping not to be targeted, might just result in your drowning in a pool of very fouled Marxist swamp water. But that’s just me, and my opinion. Glub. And oh, then there is also this:
A.I. is frequently unstable, unpredictable, and uncontrollable, at times. Glub, glub, g-glup…
And, just so you know: I’m not going to leave MeWe until Valentines Day, or later. If my account vanishes before that, you can check here for any report of censorship for having sought to expose the problem as I see it. ALL COMMENTS WELCOME, including MeWe staff — anonymously, if desired.
How TI’s Can Identify & Deal w Low Flying Aircraft
Targeted Individuals and ‘persons of interest’ tend to get nervous when they seem to be dogged by low flying planes or choppers. There is a way to determine if it is coincidence and harmless, or not, and who might be responsible, if actual targeting.
by H. Michael Sweeney proparanoid.wordpress.com Facebook proparanoid.net
Dateline, Oct 22, 2020, from an undisclosed location somewhere Right of Center. copyright © 2020, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this notice and byline, are included. Quote freely, links requested. Please comment any such repost or quote link to original posting.
NOTICE: Fascistbook and their ilk (Twister, et. al) blocks any URL to my blog site. SO, if you wish to Share or Post a link in social media, you may wish to write out the url with spaces between wordpress and com (use no dot), instead of supplying a pasted link… or you are wasting your time and helping censors to win.
Zoooooom! Ad nausium
Many TIs find that (often the same) airplane(s) seem to be constantly in the skies overhead as they travel (surveillance, tracking), or overflying their location at extremely low altitudes (harassment). It has happened to me at times, at the heights of my being a ‘person of interest’ to rogue operatives of various Federal Agencies. For me, it included a ‘spat’ with FBI, FAA, and NTSB in the Flight 800 shoot-down investigation, as I was revealing very condemning proofs of a fraudulent cover up. There was also a time when I went head-to-head with a terror cell planning to suicide-crash small private aircraft into a gas stations while refueling from tanker trucks (called Gas Station Tasking by President Bush). They were making daily practice overflights and diving briefly at altitudes so low that you could make out the rivets. And, two of FBI’s top-10 Most Wanted were involved on the ground, face-to-face. The tools I’m reviewing, here, were not available in those days, and its availability is good news to those unaware of it.
The tool I’m speaking of is even available on your smart phone or other web/wifi/cell device, and affords International coverage. Just type in ‘flightradar24.com’, which tracks more than 180,000 aircraft in the air at any given point in time… any planes which can be seen by the global aviation radar network, transponder/radio-tracking stations, and satellites. Their coverage is increasing over time, as well, with excellent coverage in Europe, North America, and SE Asia, Australia/NZ, and major air corridors/destinations. It is a very robust site in terms of features useful to anyone wanting to track a given aircraft (i.e., a commercial flight a loved one is aboard), or anyone involved in aviation. At this time, it does not track military aircraft, likely for good reason (see Tactical Advice for alternatives).
I learned about this site by watching live streaming content on Twitch by a contact who IS targeted by government agencies, and while he was talking, he noted a low flying aircraft buzzing his house (not rare, sez he). Live, while he is already in screen capture mode so I’m seeing his computer screen, within seconds, he was able to identify the aircraft, complete with a picture of it, and owner/operator information. There is more that he could have done, but he laughed it off (the right way to deal with any harassment) and went on with his presentation.
When you first arrive at the site, you are presented with a Map, likely focused on Europe or some part of the globe other than your location. The first time you visit, you might want to click on Create Account, which involves either providing your email addy, or a click on one of the social media giants with whom you may have an account. Then select the ‘BASIC’ plan, which is FREE (or one of the paid plans). Basic will do what you want, by and large, and to a useful level. If you don’t want to set up an account, you do not have to, but if you do, it will remember your location so you don’t have to struggle with getting the map to display your area. That will better insure you spot your plane before it gets too far away on the map, to be certain.
The Tool
The first time, you will have to do that, anyway, but once you have relocated to your greater area and zoomed in (not too close, because at aircraft speeds, the plane you are looking for might be rather distant in a hurry), the site will remember that location and speed you on your way to an answer, if you set up a plan. Unless you are near a major flight corridor, a broader view will not be cluttered with too many planes, and especially if you know the direction of flight, you will have no trouble finding the suspected culprit. And, if there IS more than one plane, clicking on each should allow you to compare the image with what you saw, if you did get a glimpse of it, or heard it well enough to discern engine differences: jet roar, very high-pitched and loud turboprop, or buzzing loud propeller. If like me, you may even to tell if one or multiple engines, and of course, helicopters and their noises vary by size and type, as well: choppity-chop (small), whumpity-whump (large).
If you mouse over a plane’s icon, it will show you the tail number right there. If you click on it, it will pull up aircraft details as may be available. If it is a commercial aircraft of any sort (flight school, rental, commuter, airline), or an aircraft for which the owner has supplied a picture, the actual airplane should be shown. If not, a manufacturer’s photo or other image of it may appear (likely a different paint scheme/tail number — or no tail number if a marketing image), or perhaps no image. But you will always have the tail number, which is the most useful information if keeping a record (DO MAINTAIN SUCH A LOG) or wanting to escalate the matter officially toward possible actions against the operators (I would not do that unless the same plane was buzzing you repeatedly in a single flight or the like).
Note: if a plane has blocked out it’s tail number, is flying below radar, and has its transponder turned off or has none, it won’t be on the Map; you won’t have a tail number. In such a case, go to the Tactical Advice section, below, and treat it as if a military aircraft, except that instead of complaining to the military, go to the FAA in like manner. Try to get other eye witnesses, pictures, or videos, if you can, should you be doubted.
Once selected, with a small delay, the flight path of the aircraft will show up as a yellow-green line, which will tell you its point of origin… sometimes helpful in getting information about the owners, esp. if other methods fail (Note: in the example image, YKM is the Airport indicator: Yakima; another way to know point of origin, and to the right of that, you find the destination airport). A harassing/following aircraft will likely originate from a nearby airport, so if you see it originated from or destined for a location several hundreds of miles away, it is likely a coincidental matter involving no targeting.
If your Log shows a common origin for one or more planes, but you are unable to determine the owner, that runway facility is the targeteer’s base of operations, and a drive out to the site (if practical) may allow you to find where it is parked and associate it with a business or other entity — perhaps with photo in hand, asking around for info. You can also elect to follow it until it arrives at destination, which if actually an overflight as part of your targeting, will likely be the point of origin. If not, it was likely mere coincidence, even if multiple sightings or patterns are revealed in your Log. After all, businesses and even private pilots have patterns in their work, too. This is especially true of flight-school aircraft, as exampled in the image, doing touch-and-go landing practice, Ironically, right over where I once lived, in Yakima, Wa.
The Basic plan limits you pretty much to the above. But if you elect the Silver Plan ($10 a year), there are more features, including removal of the annoying pop up ads which block part of the view and often can’t seem to be removed when you click the x box. A couple of the other features could be extremely helpful if you are frequently harassed by aircraft: ALERTS will let you tag a given tail number and be alerted when it is in flight, and allow tracking; HISTORY of a given aircraft can be tracked backwards in time for up to 90 days, including ground time; DETAILS provides complete Registration information, serial number, and other data to include speed, altitude, and much more. There are additional things which may or may not prove useful to a particular situation. There are also more expensive plan options with increased feature levels and whole new features.
Tactical Advice
If you keep a good log such that you feel you can demonstrate one or more specific aircraft/operators are involved in harassment, there are things you can do which could provide some level of relief and/or satisfaction, perhaps to include an investigation or legal actions to your advantage. Such legal actions might be something you would wish to consider (with good counsel of an attorney), but they might also be initiated by FAA or some other agency without any expense or direct involvement by you. The tail number is often enough to achieve that, because FAA, FBI, and Police all have the means to take it from there. But if you needed to take action of some sort of your own against an operator, legal or otherwise, you would need to identify the operator. If the Tool is not providing that information for a given aircraft, its not a roadblock.
Often, just typing the tail number along with ‘tail number’ into your browser will likely pull up FAA registration information. If that fails, you can normally go directly to registry.faa.gov and type it in, there. Sometimes, the answer will still be less than useful. CIA aircraft are often not identified as such, for instance, and may instead be registered to a business or private individual, or return nada. However, there are people who track CIA aircraft independently for various reasons. Sometimes, just adding ‘CIA’ to your web search via tail number will give you a hit. Otherwise, you would want to focus on trying to find out who operates the aircraft at its home airport (business name, most likely an innocent sounding front). Sometimes, it’s an obvious military/intelligence company ‘contractor,’ perhaps so identified publicly on their Web site or literature. But also, my book, The Professional Paranoid, details how to research such firms to see if they fit the profile of a CIA front.
Some aircraft defy identification… military aircraft, for instance, are invisible to the Tool. Often, they may be black, unmarked, or moving too fast to see any markings. But assuming you have the time, location, and direction of travel, and some general description (i.e., small helicopter), the FAA should be able to identify it. If you get a decent look, you can do online searches of US military aircraft at military.com and find the exact type (i.e., MH6 – a small tactical helicopter). FAA might not give you a lot of information about it, perhaps none, but they might tell you something like it being an Army training flight (and it might or might not be the official and true answer, of course… their answer might simply be presumptive, far easier than actually trying to find out the true answer). You may find answers vary in detail over time. That’s not hints of something nefarious, it is just likely a lack of interest vs. a more friendly or service-minded person at the other end. But just confirming its existence is good. Put whatever answers you get into your Log.
Once you seem to have enough instances suggesting a pattern, you will also likely have established the base of operations (i.e., a local Air National Guard unit). They will have a Public Relations Officer, and they won’t know you from Adam. Give them a call, giving a random phony name, and say you are a photographer would would like to photograph (type of aircraft of concern) in flight, and wonder if there are training flight paths or operational flight paths anywhere in your (county) that you might be able to position yourself, and if there are particular days or hours that would be best hunting. I’d tell you to record that call, but that would be illegal almost everywhere, so take good notes, including name of contact, time and date, length of call, and their answers.
Wait some time and continue to grow the Log, while at the same time, going to any selected flight path per the ‘good hunting’ suggestions as to time/days, and get a sense of the frequency of flights, there, in a separate Log. Compare both Logs: if much greater frequency in targeting than in training, get the Base Commander’s name (should be online at the base web site), and write a formal and simple (non-targeting oriented) complaint of constant ‘noisy’ overflights with a detailed history of time/date/aircraft types from your Log. They will probably acknowledge with a presumptive reply about training flights, the easy and usually correct response. Respond with your prior research through the PR Officer citing the difference, and ask for an investigation of the discrepancy, and the name of the person authorizing or ordering the flights ever your home, and official reasons for those ‘apparently non-training’ flights.
There will likely be resistance and side-stepping, to which you should counter by asking if you should instead be contacting the Pentagon through your Senator, because it feels like intentional harassment. Oops! They wouldn’t like that. And, if it is the aircraft shown below, contact me each and every time you see it; it is a known mind control operations aircraft, called Command Solo —- note the unusual antenna configuration. In any threat about a Senator, if this plane is involved, do specifically mention ‘Command Solo psychological operations aircraft.’ If you must, contact your Senator, and cc local media. Oops!! This outreach should not get into your targeting, but you can say ‘it feels like deliberate harassment, given the sidestepping and misinformation in official answers.’ It would help if you could find neighbors willing to add their names to any such outreach. If the overflights bug you, they likely bug them, too. For more information about outreach tips, read this.
- This post is, in .pdf form, part of the authors’ Free Helps Kit available to stalking victims, which contains many, many more such files, as well as a victim’s workbook which has proven very helpful towards determining the who, what, how, and why of their targeting. Email proparanoidgroup at gmail com to obtain the Kit, which also provides information about the Free Will Society to aid severely impacted stalking victims.
A TI with RF Measuring Device can = Dangerous Conclusions
Low Cost RF/MW reading devices are often purchased by TIs as a defensive tool against their targeting fears. However, the general topic (TSCM – Technical Security CounterMeasures) is just that: TECHNICAL, and readings from such a device can easily lead a TI to panic and over react. Here is why, and how to get more out of such devices, without the risk of serious mistakes.
by H. Michael Sweeney proparanoid.wordpress.com Facebook proparanoid.net
copyright © 2017, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this notice and byline, are included. Quote freely, links requested. Please comment any such repost or quote link to original posting. Updated Dec 2017 – Corrected technical boo boo and added a couple of closing paragraphs somehow deleted and not caught. Changes indicated with red intro. What you will learn reading this post: • all TIs could benefit from professional TSCM electronic sweeps; • that isn’t likely to happen; • the poor-man’s TSCM pro isn’t a pro, and might be a fraud; • there are low-cost meters but improper use can be dangerous in many ways; • there is a solution, and help implementing it — and here it is…The way it is
A Targeted Individual can almost always benefit greatly from a professional TSCM sweep. Such a sweep, clandestinely done, could provide significant courtroom quality proof of electronic surveillance and/or harassment with directed energy weapons or mind altering signals, such as EEG entrainment, subliminal messaging, V2S, implants, and more. If you are new to targeting and don’t know these terms, read my books. With very rare exceptions, virtually all TIs are exposed to some form of electronic targeting, and such a sweep can precisely identify who is operating the equipment, the nature of targeting, and evaluate the threat and suggest defensive/offensive options. That typically includes their providing documented reports and personal courtroom expert testimony. Combined with optional services equivalent to a private investigator, it could even end up revealing who ordered and is behind the targeting. They can also potentially detect bioimplants in the victim’s body.
Just some of the gear needed for a professional TSCM sweep completely meeting a TI’s needs.
Unfortunately, there are two reasons no TI has ever used TSCM professionals with success, and hardly any have ever used it, at all. The first reason is, that only the wealthy can afford it. A truly effective sweep of a home or work place, can cost between $20,000 and $60,000. That is because the professional will need to apply towards a million dollars worth of specialized gear, and must have decades of experience in order to be qualified to do so and have the results stand up in court. Rather than ‘meters,’ they employ sophisticated signal analyzers and other toys for a full-spectrum solution (including light and audio threats).
Sigh. Add to Christmas wish list, and hope Santa is generous.
The second reason, is that all such qualified TSCM are almost always ex government/intelligence community/military/military contractors, and are therefore, by default, subject to ‘conversion,’ because almost all targeting is ultimately at the hands of those same players. By request or by bribe, the risk is that they will give a false report showing no targeting. It is simply impossible to vet a TSCM pro against this risk, unless you happen to have a personal family/friendship relationship in place from the start. I had such a contact, and the government framed him on illegal weapons and drug charges and put him in jail, confiscated all his equipment. James Atkinson (‘Granite Island’) helped me write my first book, filling it with informative information about TSCM and what government agency uses what frequencies for what purposes (data table and other information in The Professional Paranoid). Friends are keeping his informative web site up and running for him. Visit.
So what is a TI to do? One solution, is to go with less than a true pro TSCM guy with all that gear, someone like me, perhaps, who has nearly $20,000 in gear, and some investigated skills (I’ve put a lot of people in jail, shut down illegal CIA fronts, forced corrupt officials to resign, and ended targeting for clients). Unfortunately, there are crooked people out there pretending to be ‘like me’ using even less sophisticated gear (regardless of what they claim). I have seen YouTube videos of alleged ‘bioimplant scans’ where the scanner was charging $100 per implant found, and gee… everyone scanned naturally had between three and six implants, or more — until their money ran out. And yet, not.
The problem was, the meter being used, like most such meters, has an instruction manual warning that false readings will be obtained if one touches the sensing area of the meter (the business end). You are supposed to hold them a certain way to avoid that. A fraudulent scanner, however, holds it differently, such that he merely moves his finger to tap or touch the front whenever he wants to ‘find’ an implant, bug, signal. Sadly, this service was widely promoted by one of the largest and best known TI community groups. It even resulted in a multimillion dollar lawsuit, and that group ultimately disintegrated. One clue it was a scam was ignored by all: to get the scan, you had to fly into a small remote town with all of one Police officer, check into a hotel, and get scanned within a small window of time. Poof! the scanner was gone before the fraud could be reported and investigated, and many thousands of dollars richer for a half-day’s work.
A decent start if you have something in the range of $10K to spend. It is virtually a hand-held spectrum analyzer… that unfortunately does not see military gear.
Another solution is to buy your own meter. Prices can be as low as $100, even less (be wary when so). Not quite a perfect solution, in truth, because no such product, even towards $20,000, is designed and sold for the kind of use to which the TI intends. They are designed to measure the same kinds of signals (with significant limitations, usually), but for other cause, such as testing equipment against RF emission safety standards, or to ensure they are putting out the right kind of signal. The instruction manuals only speak to such uses, and the manufacturers/sellers have zero interest in helping a TI do what they need to do with the product. Nor will they accept returns based on failures to be useful in such an application. You are on your own.
Because of the technicalities involved, and in the face of a lack of instructions, it is not only extremely rare that a given TI will know what a given reading means, but also quite likely that they will make a false and potentially dangerous wrong conclusion as to meaning, and then take wrong actions in defense of that false conclusion. A TI easily makes silly mistakes, and the results can be frightening (ex: aiming the meter at the sky will yield seriously high readings, but is NOT a threat. Many TIs assume it means satellite targeting. No, no, and no.) An example of a serious wrong action would be false accusations of an innocent party, or spending limited financial resources for shielding or legal defenses applied uselessly. And there is another common risk…
All too often, a TI will call Police or go to other authorities or perhaps seek legal, medical, or psychological professional help, meter and readings in hand, intending to ‘prove their case.’ All they end up accomplishing, is being marked down as a very strange person with a strange little box and an even stranger and unbelievable story; a lunatic who needs mental health care. No one will understand the little black box or its readings, much less the story offered behind it all. They have never heard of TSCM, most likely, and so the entire concept is like talking about the kind of propulsion systems used on flying saucers. And if they do know about TSCM, they will know your meter is a ‘joke,’ and automatically conclude that your use of it and conclusions are just as silly, no matter what the truth is.
Note: there is one other potential ‘poor man’ solution — the use of a smart phone ap to simulate an RF/EMF meter. Yes, and no. Extremely limited range and scale of operation, extremely broad angle of view, and quite prone to misinterpretation. In fact, it has nothing to do with electronic solution; it only measures the Earths natural EMF. It has no value for personal protection, as I’ve written of, here.
Don’t give up too fast… all is not lost
Don’t give up on the notion, because there are some useful uses for such meters, if approached properly. One must simply alter expectations, and have a better grounding in how to properly use low cost meters such as those described herein from trifield.com, for the purpose. I can help with that. But let’s first talk about expectations:
Implant quite similar visually (smaller) to one found in my own leg some 35 years ago. State of the art, today, can be 200 times smaller, translucent, tissue colored, and bond with tissue: invisible to a surgeon and to x-ray. MRI sees only an inconsequential image blemish.
a) you are not going to use them to find implants with much chance of success. There is only one type of implant they MIGHT find, which is the type which constantly broadcasts information. An example might be a tracking implant, or a health monitoring implant. Under the right circumstances, you might find such an implant. But most implants used in targeting are either not going to broadcast anything… instead receiving signals useless in detection — or they are going to deliberately use special broadcast methods most meters cannot see or respond to usefully;
b) you are not going to use them to find V2S, subliminal, or EEG manipulation signals. You can see these signals, but they blend into the background and do not stand out as such; they cannot be isolated and identified with simple meters;
c) you can use them with some confidence to identify DEW and other targeting signal directional sources. While it is relatively easy to misread signals and erroneously presume them an attack signal, if read during an attack and relying on the strongest signal sources, only, you are likely correct in the presumption. You can then plan shielding strategies more effectively, and narrow your list of suspect enemy positions and personnel to those within that angle of attack. With some luck, you might actually pinpoint the source and perps involved, but it won’t be legally useful. But focused video surveillance (don’t break the law), with luck, may confirm suspicions sufficiently to be considered legally useful evidence. Rely on video documentation of not just the doings at such sites, but also video of meter readings during attacks, to prepare potentially useful evidence… useful to perhaps interest someone into considering your story… knowing the likelihood is that they will still reject it as lunacy. Risk vs. Benefit is your decision guide about attempting to convince them;
d) you can use them to identify the type of signal, in some cases. They type and sophistication of the meter, and your ability to use them properly, will determine if that is the case, or not. It is quite easy to make wrong assumptions, as there are so many kinds of attack signals across a broad spectrum of frequencies (bands of RF energy). Most serious threats operate at frequencies well above the capabilities of low cost meters. Even my $20,000 gear cannot see above 12 gHz microwave, which is where most military bands operate. But if your enemy is not military based, you might have a chance with $20K gear… but with gear costing hundreds of dollars, your chances diminish to the point of being limited, perhaps, to seeing things an amateur or Cop might employ.
e) you can use them to warn of a DEW attack before it becomes a problem in terms of physical/mental effect. There is one particular low cost meter best suited to this use, allowing you to relocate yourself away from the attack area… the meter will advise when escape has been achieved (cease the warning). It will also indicate if you are being ‘tracked’ by a signal by some means (generally some kind of surveillance, or by a locating implant), and can give you a general sense of the direction of the attack signal source, much like the Trifield. It is not, however, a great substitute for the capabilities of the Trifield beyond that, but it is a better warning device than the Trifield, because it is automatic, and always operating, unless switched off. It can even clip to your clothing or be carried in a pocket, or set down anywhere near you;
f) you can use such meters to determine if the signal levels exceed safety limits set by government and NGO organizations. This, in turn, can sometimes be used to force government agencies, most notably the FCC, OSHA, to investigate on your behalf, though it is quite likely such investigations will not match your findings; the enemy will simply shut down temporarily. But at least you get a brief vacation from assault. When concerned about safety levels, you will want to carefully review online searches to compare the latest (always being adjusted downward) standards and what a level represent in terms of health issues, and that will prove to be quite technical — you need to carefully compare your meter reading and scale used for the set limits, which may require unit conversion (usually a matter of multiplying or dividing by 10 or 100; most such resources will give you instructions for conversion or cite alternate unit results for you). With luck, your findings can be matched to specific known physical symptoms for a given reading level, which if matched to your symptoms and reading levels obtained, can be useful if well documented (video of your readings and symptoms + industry data);
g) you might be able to use them to find surveillance technology, to include listening devices and cameras. Again, sophistication and skill of the user are key. There are devices better suited to this purpose which remain low in cost. Use a search engine (bug and camera detection gear) for that. Same for (phone bug detection). See my post on cellphones.
Now as to the other key requirement, proper use…
Fortunately, there are two specific low-cost devices I can recommend with confidence, and for which I can provide rather specific instructional advice on how to use them for TI needs. They are the devices I started with early on for my own needs, after some considerable informed research — and successfully used to confirm my own electronic targeting, source location, and identity of the operator at that location. It allowed effective shielding response which ended the threat, and finding of listening devices. It helped me to develop other tactics to defeat targeting which did not involve shielding. They had other benefits, as well, not the least of which was improved peace of mind.
As result, I made a special deal with the manufacturer (Trifield): they would sell them to me at a small discount for resale to TIs, and send TI requests for information or purchase to me… on the proviso (my idea) that I provide an instruction manual for TI uses, be responsible for any returns and customer service issues arising from TI uses. They did not want that business at all, and would not sell them to TIs if they understood such was their use/need. While I am no longer in a position to provide the service, which as a kind of rent-to-own trial program for which no one ever declined to own (it worked well for them), I do still offer the instructions (an emailed .pdf file, illustrated).
These are for the trusty and versatile Trifield meter (avoid the more costly blue-faced version, generally less useful to TI needs) and SmartAlert 2 microwave detection device offered at trifield.com. Both meters are very low cost: you can buy both for less than $300, just don’t mention targeting. My manual gives broad instructional use for both meters, and additionally includes an idea on how to modify (at relatively low cost) an entire room to be a faraday cage without dramatic change in the appearance of the room.
I used to sell the instructions for $20, with the purchase price applied to the purchase of a meter. The idea was that one could see what the instructions were like without risking the investment in a meter, and if thinking it doable, go for the meter without wasting the $20, as I made it free with a meter if purchased outright. It was a confidence-building approach to decision making.
I also tried to talk people out of doing it by pointing out everything in this article. Only if they got past all the negatives, and still wanted to proceed, DID I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THEIR DECISION. I needed to feel it was right, too, because I did not want a meter to be returned — a wanted a successful use of it to better the user’s targeting situation.
Since I no longer sell the meter, I make the file available on request by email to anyone willing to make a contribution to the Free Will Society, and our effort there to establish Free Will Haven, a targeting-free, low-cost, self-sustaining intentional community (learn more here). There are two ways to go: A $20 donation gets you the manual. A $50 donation gets you the manual AND membership in the Free Will Society (you must have a Facebook account, as well, to participate in membership dialogs) and an ebook copy of The Professional Paranoid, which also talks about privacy/security issues, which includes material also related to meter use as described in the introduction (frequency usage). That, alone is a $12 value. By all means, donate more, if so moved.
Note: A secondary goal of the Free Will Society, is to subsequently establish a mobile strike team with a full professional TSCM sweep capability, to include a van full of gear (image above). This would be used not only by Free Will Haven, but be able to be sent anywhere in the country to target perps covertly, and nail them to the cross, and blow the whole topic of political control technology wide open in media, and in the halls of government… globally. And yes, that means yet another million dollars are needed. So add zeros to your donation 🙂
The manual’s instructions can generally be applied to any similar products, if one simply reads between the lines, and compares the differences between meters usefully. This is true even if talking about the $20K flavor, though the capabilities will expand greatly as meter sophistication (and price) increases. Just keep in mind that an expensive and more sophisticated meter will likely require some IEEE technical expertise, such as I actually have. I even have some background in microwave technology, and signal processing as employed by the intelligence community (selling and installing such technology, as well as general security and alarm equipment).
The greatest improvement high-end gear offers will be in the range of frequencies (bands) which can be analyzed, but there are many other benefits to better units, as well. For instance, the ability log to memory the readings as you go, plug them into a computer for even more signal analysis (big step up in usefulness), and improved sensitivity in range and angle of reading. A low cost meter reads rather broadly, say 30-40 degrees of arc, perhaps more, where my meter reads as little as 3-6 degrees of arc. Most low cost meters don’t even specify, and the ‘funnel’ nature of a broad angle contributes to misinterpretations of reading importance or meaning. Narrow is good, but you can compensate by taking care and multiple readings from multiple angles (triangulate).
Finally, we need to talk about what constitutes a dangerous signal reading on a meter. These devices display information in a wide variety of formats and scales which leave a non technical person with no understanding of what a high reading actually means. It only matters and is useful defensively if and when the reading exceeds safe levels. Different kinds of signals might be deemed dangerous at a lower level than the kinds of signal. For example, pulsed microwave is the most dangerous of all, and can be so at quite low strength. This is normally the main threat a TI faces, but most low cost meters cannot distinguish between them, or measure them correctly. This is not something commonly mentioned in their specifications, and you need talk to their engineers to inquire, to be sure the meter can deal with it correctly.
As far as safe levels, there are many levels established by many agencies of many countries for many purposes. What is deemed safe in one view or situation, may not be save in another view or situation. The nice thing about the expensive meter I use, is that it knows all these limits and indicates when one or more are exceeded. With a low end meter, you need to compare your reading to the various standards. Learn more about such standards, here.
proparanoid 